Design Principle: Favor Composition Over Inheritance

Here at HauteLook,we’re almost constantly interviewing engineers. Not because we have high turnover,but because we’re always growing the team and it’s difficult to find engineers that have the skill level required to join our team. Part of our interview includes a “virtual whiteboard” using a Google doc. And part of that virtual whiteboard exercise includes representing a complex object,showing its properties and methods. We don’t ask for (or care about) valid UML; all that we care about is seeing that the candidate understands object-oriented design (OOD).

Many of our candidates do a wonderful job of constructing a complex hierarchy of inheritance. This gets the job done,but it doesn’t really allow a system to be extensible. When you overuse inheritance,you are basically designing according to assumptions which may seem true at the time,but which will likely not be true as the application is required to change. A key design principle isEncapsulate What Varies. The design principle covered in the post you’re currently reading,Favor Composition Over Inheritance,is one way of following the Encapsulate What Varies principle.

The overuse of inheritance in OOD is common,and is understandable. Many code examples in textbooks show inheritance astheway to make code reusable. And a design that utilizes a nice inheritance hierarchy does appear to make good sense. However,when you need to make a system do something that you hadn’t originally designed it for,the benefits you thought you were getting from an inheritance hierarchy suddenly become the sole reason to refactor your code. When subclasses inherit multiple behaviors from a parent class,they are locked into having those behaviors. The solution is simple,right? Just override those methods and implement the desired behavior for that subclass. But what if another subclass of the same parent has the same issue? Now,if you override the behavior in that subclass too,you have duplicated code.

Let me provide an example. (Note that I’m not going to design classes as we ask for in our whiteboard exercise. Instead,I’ll demonstrate this principle with code.) Let’s say that we want to design a class that plays music. The two concrete examples that we are required to implement are a record player (to play all the awesome 70’s music) and an 8-track player (just because). So we design a base AbstractPlayer class. It might look something like this:

abstract class AbstractPlayer
{
    public function play()
    {
        echo "I'm playing music through my speakers!";
    }
 
    public function stop()
    {
        echo "I'm not playing music anymore.";
    }
}

Looks simple enough,right? And our Recordplayer and EighttrackPlayer classes would inherit from AbstractPlayer and would therefore inherit the play() and stop() methods:

class Recordplayer extends AbstractPlayer
{
 
}
 
class EighttrackPlayer extends AbstractPlayer
{
 
}
?

Here’s some client code using the Recordplayer:

$record_player = new Recordplayer;
$record_player->play(); // echoes "I'm playing music through my speakers!"
Awesome! So Now,some time goes by,and we get a request to implement a portable cassette player. It would probably be just like the above two concrete classes,but it would need to be able to play through headphones instead of speakers. Here’s what it might look like:

class PortableCassettePlayer extends AbstractPlayer
{
    public function play()
    {
        echo "I'm playing music through headphones!";
    }
}
Makes sense,right? Our PortableCassettePlayer inherits from AbstractPlayer and tweaks the play() method a little. Now,fast-forward a couple of decades,and we need to implement an Mp3Player class.

class Mp3Player extends AbstractPlayer
{
    public function play()
    {
        echo "I'm playing music through headphones!";
    }
}
Notice that we essentially copied the play() method from the PortableCassettePlayer class. We Couldn’t just use the play() method from the base class because the Mp3Player can have headphones plugged in. Maybe we Could inherit from the PortableCassettePlayer class,but then we’d inherit a ton of other functionality,such as ejecting a cassette tape,which doesn’t make sense for an MP3 player. The problem here is that inheritance has locked us into certain assumptions,and the design that was intended to encourage code reuse actually causes code duplication.

Instead of using inheritance to reuse functionality,let’s look at a design that uses composition. First,we’ll encapsulate the play() behavior:

interface PlayBehaviorInterface
{
    public function play();
}
 
class PlayBehaviorSpeakers implements PlayBehaviorInterface
{
    public function play()
    {
        echo "I'm playing music through my speakers!";
    }
}
 
class PlayBehaviorHeadphones implements PlayBehaviorInterface
{
    public function play()
    {
        echo "I'm playing music through headphones!";
    }
}
Now the play functionality is encapsulated into classes. Maybe you’re thinking,“aren’t classes supposed to representthings?” Well,in this case,the thing they’re representing is a behavior.

Let’s see how the Player classes can Now use these new behavior classes.

abstract class AbstractPlayer
{
    protected $play_behavior;
 
    abstract protected function _createPlayBehavior();
 
    public function __construct()
    {
        $this->setPlayBehavior($this->_createPlayBehavior());
    }
 
    public function play()
    {
        $this->play_behavior->play();
    }
 
    public function setPlayBehavior(PlayBehaviorInterface $play_behavior)
    {
        $this->play_behavior = $play_behavior;
    }
 
    public function stop()
    {
        echo "I'm not playing music anymore.";
    }
}
Notice that the AbstractPlayer has a constructor which sets the default player behavior. It also has a new setPlayBehavior() method. This allows to set whatever play behavior we want at runtime. It also requires implementation of a method called _createPlayBehavior(),so concrete classes are forced to provide their default player behavior. (see my post onRemoving Dependencies With Factory Method.)

Let’s create our Mp3Player class:

class Mp3Player extends AbstractPlayer
{
    protected function _createPlayBehavior()
    {
        return new PlayBehaviorHeadphones;
    }
}
The Mp3Player class sets an instance of PlayBehaviorHeadphones as its play behavior. Pretty cool,right? So imagine that a few more years pass,and Now our Mp3Player needs to also support playing through a Bluetooth connection. What do we need to change in our Mp3Player class? Think about it for a second. The answer: absolutely nothing! We simply write a new class to encapsulate this new behavior:

class PlayBehaviorBluetooth implements PlayBehaviorInterface
{
    public function play()
    {
        echo "I'm playing music wirelessly through Bluetooth!";
    }
}
This new behavior class can be plugged into the Mp3Player class at runtime if the player is meant to support this functionality. The client code that instantiates the Mp3Player class handles this:

$mp3_player = new Mp3Player;
$mp3_player->play(); //echoes "I'm playing music through headphones!"
$mp3_player->setPlayBehavior(new PlayBehaviorBluetooth);
$mp3_player->play(); //echoes "I'm playing music wirelessly through Bluetooth!"
Beautiful,right? Encapsulating behaviors into separate classes gives us true extensibility. In fact,design principles such as Favor Composition Over Inheritance are the reason that we have design patterns. The main pattern used in the above examples isStrategy Pattern. Some other patterns that demonstrate this principle are Observer,Decorator,and State.

Oh,and one more thing to mention: the fact that we were able to drop in new functionality without changing existing code exemplifies another awesome design principle,the Open-Closed Principle. This principle states that classes should beclosedto modification butopento extension.

As you think about how to structure your code,I encourage you to keep this principle in mind,and see how it can improve your design. You’ll thank yourself when you have to go back and add new functionality.

原文链接 http://www.hautelooktech.com/2013/02/05/design-principle-favor-composition-over-inheritance/

版权声明:本文内容由互联网用户自发贡献,该文观点与技术仅代表作者本人。本站仅提供信息存储空间服务,不拥有所有权,不承担相关法律责任。如发现本站有涉嫌侵权/违法违规的内容, 请发送邮件至 dio@foxmail.com 举报,一经查实,本站将立刻删除。

相关推荐


迭代器模式(Iterator)迭代器模式(Iterator)[Cursor]意图:提供一种方法顺序访问一个聚合对象中的每个元素,而又不想暴露该对象的内部表示。应用:STL标准库迭代器实现、Java集合类型迭代器等模式结构:心得:迭代器模式的目的是在不获知集合对象内部细节的同时能对集合元素进行遍历操作
高性能IO模型浅析服务器端编程经常需要构造高性能的IO模型,常见的IO模型有四种:(1)同步阻塞IO(BlockingIO):即传统的IO模型。(2)同步非阻塞IO(Non-blockingIO):默认创建的socket都是阻塞的,非阻塞IO要求socket被设置为NONBLOCK。注意这里所说的N
策略模式(Strategy)策略模式(Strategy)[Policy]意图:定义一系列算法,把他们封装起来,并且使他们可以相互替换,使算法可以独立于使用它的客户而变化。应用:排序的比较方法、封装针对类的不同的算法、消除条件判断、寄存器分配算法等。模式结构:心得:对对象(Context)的处理操作可
访问者模式(Visitor)访问者模式(Visitor)意图:表示一个作用于某对象结构中的各元素的操作,它使你在不改变各元素的类的前提下定义作用于这些元素的新操作。应用:作用于编译器语法树的语义分析算法。模式结构:心得:访问者模式是要解决对对象添加新的操作和功能时候,如何尽可能不修改对象的类的一种方
命令模式(Command)命令模式(Command)[Action/Transaction]意图:将一个请求封装为一个对象,从而可用不同的请求对客户参数化。对请求排队或记录请求日志,以及支持可撤消的操作。应用:用户操作日志、撤销恢复操作。模式结构:心得:命令对象的抽象接口(Command)提供的两个
生成器模式(Builder)生成器模式(Builder)意图:将一个对象的构建和它的表示分离,使得同样的构建过程可以创建不同的表示。 应用:编译器词法分析器指导生成抽象语法树、构造迷宫等。模式结构:心得:和工厂模式不同的是,Builder模式需要详细的指导产品的生产。指导者(Director)使用C
设计模式学习心得《设计模式:可复用面向对象软件的基础》一书以更贴近读者思维的角度描述了GOF的23个设计模式。按照书中介绍的每个设计模式的内容,结合网上搜集的资料,我将对设计模式的学习心得总结出来。网络上关于设计模式的资料和文章汗牛充栋,有些文章对设计模式介绍生动形象。但是我相信“一千个读者,一千个
工厂方法模式(Factory Method)工厂方法模式(Factory Method)[Virtual Constructor]意图:定义一个用于创建对象的接口,让子类决定实例化哪一个类,使一个类的实力化延迟到子类。应用:多文档应用管理不同类型的文档。模式结构:心得:面对同一继承体系(Produc
单例模式(Singleton)单例模式(Singleton)意图:保证一个类只有一个实例,并提供一个访问它的全局访问点。应用:Session或者控件的唯一示例等。模式结构:心得:单例模式应该是设计模式中最简单的结构了,它的目的很简单,就是保证自身的实例只有一份。实现这种目的的方式有很多,在Java中
装饰者模式(Decorator)装饰者模式(Decorator)[Wrapper]意图:动态的给一个对象添加一些额外的职责,就增加功能来说,比生成子类更为灵活。应用:给GUI组件添加功能等。模式结构:心得:装饰器(Decorator)和被装饰的对象(ConcreteComponent)拥有统一的接口
抽象工厂模式(Abstract Factory)抽象工厂模式(Abstract Factory)[Kit]意图:提供一个创建一系列相关或相互依赖对象的接口,而无须指定他们具体的类。应用:用户界面工具包。模式结构:心得:工厂方法把生产产品的方式封装起来了,但是一个工厂只能生产一类对象,当一个工厂需要生
桥接模式(Bridge)桥接模式(Bridge)[Handle/Body]意图:将抽象部分与它的实现部分分离,使他们都可以独立的变化。应用:不同系统平台的Windows界面。模式结构:心得:用户所见类体系结构(Window派生)提供了一系列用户的高层操作的接口,但是这些接口的实现是基于具体的底层实现
适配器模式(Adapter)适配器模式(Adapter)[Wrapper]意图:将类的一个接口转换成用户希望的另一个接口,使得原本由于接口不兼容而不能一起工作的类可以一起工作。应用:将图形类接口适配到用户界面组件类中。模式结构:心得:适配器模式一般应用在具有相似接口可复用的条件下。目标接口(Targ
组合模式(Composition)组合模式(Composition)意图:将对象组合成树形结构以表示“部分-整体”的层次结构,使得用户对单个对象和组合对象的使用具有一致性。应用:组合图形、文件目录、GUI容器等。模式结构:心得: 用户(Client)通过抽象类(Component)提供的公用接口统一
原型模式(Prototype)原型模式(Prototype)意图:用原型实例制定创建对象的种类,并且通过拷贝这些原型创建新的对象。应用:Java/C#中的Clonable和IClonable接口等。模式结构:心得:原型模式本质上就是对象的拷贝,使用对象拷贝代替对象创建的原因有很多。比如对象的初始化构
什么是设计模式一套被反复使用、多数人知晓的、经过分类编目的、代码 设计经验 的总结;使用设计模式是为了 可重用 代码、让代码 更容易 被他人理解、保证代码 可靠性;设计模式使代码编制  真正工程化;设计模式使软件工程的 基石脉络, 如同大厦的结构一样;并不直接用来完成代码的编写,而是 描述 在各种不同情况下,要怎么解决问题的一种方案;能使不稳定依赖于相对稳定、具体依赖于相对抽象,避免引
单一职责原则定义(Single Responsibility Principle,SRP)一个对象应该只包含 单一的职责,并且该职责被完整地封装在一个类中。Every  Object should have  a single responsibility, and that responsibility should be entirely encapsulated by t
动态代理和CGLib代理分不清吗,看看这篇文章,写的非常好,强烈推荐。原文截图*************************************************************************************************************************原文文本************
适配器模式将一个类的接口转换成客户期望的另一个接口,使得原本接口不兼容的类可以相互合作。
策略模式定义了一系列算法族,并封装在类中,它们之间可以互相替换,此模式让算法的变化独立于使用算法的客户。